Why all the love for number 18?

[outlaw69uk 123]

Ach bit of a shame this whole thread - but this thread doesn't really seem to have been initiated on Millers playing prowess or not but on the fact he played for them - (and yet outlaw doesn't seem to have the balls to say that - just distainfully calling him 18! and citing 'other' reasons) Sad opening post - very sad indeed!

We all have our opinions about best 11, best formation and such and as such Kenny Miller is an excellent player to have in our squad (IMHO).

well done, massive incorrect assumption If It was "because he played for them", then, I would have said so. Do i like that? no, but, its not the over riding factor. I wasnt happy when we signed him the first time, am I a bigot because he was an ex hibs player?? haha. Have you forgotten what he said when he left us the first time?

I didnt realise calling a player by his squad number was such a terrible thing

Setting anything else aside, based on ability and contribution, not good enough, not for me. A decent (at best) squad player, and thats it.

To use some other "arguments" put forward in regard to other players, when we were in dire need of shifting someone out, why no rumours about him? Even Boyd had more transfer stories and, according to some, he is well below him in ability?

Some have said he performs great for Scotland, well, not as a striker he doesnt? And, why arent Scotland successful? Thats almost the same argument as Charlie Adam performing well for Blackpool. Doesnt make him good enough for Rangers does it?

So, why the sudden change of opinion towards him, given apart from a few games, he is still the Miller of old. Why the difference between the stadium and forms?

The problem is the innuendo in your first post - I may have interpreted it wrongly but without all the innuendo laden comments it is clear you have something personal against Miller - and then choose to berate him based on factors that 'seem' to have little to do with football - i.e. you have picked on the weaknesses in his game and choose to highlight them based on initial dislike.

"other aspects about him that are unpalletable, but, part of that is a personal thing" - perhaps you could have just stated what other aspects you found unpalatable and then we could have looked at your comments based on where you are coming from.

Yes I do find the way you refer to him as No18 disrespectful - I may be wrong in this interpretation as well but I believe you meant it to be disrespectful and at best knew if would be interpreted as disrespectful.

Many of our players have faults - they get debated on here all the time - but I still question your motivations in starting this thread and it is a shame you can't acknowledge the contribution he has made since he arrived and that view seems to be based on your opinion of his 'unpalletable' aspects.

I dont understand that part? Seriously I dont. How can weaknesses in his game be anything oher than football related? As I mentioned in the thread, people are looking to play the "he played for them" card if you question/criticise his ability. Now, this is something you yourself did, yet, surely you have seen other pieces I have written? Why would I suddenly become a card carrying uber bigot over a player I dont rate? Arent there far more obvious, and, easier ways to do that?

I have also not denied he made a contribution, of course he has, as have others, but I dont think he, and others, are good enough. I also havent changed my opinion on him, throughout his career, for me, he isnt that good a player, simple as. Its my opinion, doesnt make it any more right or wrong than those who think he is the best thing since sliced bread.

You can question my motivations as much as you like, there was a very specific reason for me posting what I posted, and, in the EXACT manner I posted it. It will become clear soon enough, possibly around lunchtime when I have a break, and, in the main, the reaction was, well, more than I expected, which, in a lot of ways was disappointing, although, not unexpected in some cases.

Awaits with baited breath the rationale behind the OP! What time is your lunch ?

roughly 12pm GMT, barring any late running meetings so, by 12.30

[Right_To_Censor 1,951]

Can i just say, this whole thread was a fantasic read during my work break, just got around to reading the rest while at home and it was fantastic, outlaw i must say you've out done yerself sir.

[papaguy51 941]

As I always seem to say in these threads about our strikers, I just wish we could put them all in one big bag (including Lafferty and Boyd) and sell the bag for £10m.

I'd then use that £10m to buy two or three quality strikers who can do everything.

Problem solved, no more debate.

In this day and age we wouldn't be able to buy what you want for £10 million though.

If we spend wisely in the right places, we could get three quality players EASILY for £10m.

We'd just need to show a bit of creativeness in the market.

[outlaw69uk 123]

As I always seem to say in these threads about our strikers, I just wish we could put them all in one big bag (including Lafferty and Boyd) and sell the bag for £10m.

I'd then use that £10m to buy two or three quality strikers who can do everything.

Problem solved, no more debate.

In this day and age we wouldn't be able to buy what you want for £10 million though.

If we spend wisely in the right places, we could get three quality players EASILY for £10m.

We'd just need to show a bit of creativeness in the market.

What would the attributes of these "quality" players be? (serious question)

[papaguy51 941]

As I always seem to say in these threads about our strikers, I just wish we could put them all in one big bag (including Lafferty and Boyd) and sell the bag for £10m.

I'd then use that £10m to buy two or three quality strikers who can do everything.

Problem solved, no more debate.

In this day and age we wouldn't be able to buy what you want for £10 million though.

If we spend wisely in the right places, we could get three quality players EASILY for £10m.

We'd just need to show a bit of creativeness in the market.

What would the attributes of these "quality" players be? (serious question)

That would depend on what Smith's looking for, I suppose.

Pace and fitness would be a key base for both players.

In a perfect world, I'd be going for a little and large combination. Both fit, fast player who could perform at SPL level and improve with European matches.

Both would be able to work the channels if needed as well.

Maybe £4m for each one of them, and £2m on a young backup with great potential.

I know it's completely off the scale and would never happen, but in a perfect world with £10m for ALL our strikers, that's what I'd want.

[brissybear 50]

What a un-necessary pot shot at Kenny Miller, who has been one of our main performers this season and will be a major asset for us in this campaign.

Poor show Outlaw

Agreed, the most improved player imo.

He showed at the scumdome something that Boyd will never do, terrorise the mhanks defence and score 2 goals against them.

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

[outlaw69uk 123]

As I always seem to say in these threads about our strikers, I just wish we could put them all in one big bag (including Lafferty and Boyd) and sell the bag for £10m.

I'd then use that £10m to buy two or three quality strikers who can do everything.

Problem solved, no more debate.

In this day and age we wouldn't be able to buy what you want for £10 million though.

If we spend wisely in the right places, we could get three quality players EASILY for £10m.

We'd just need to show a bit of creativeness in the market.

What would the attributes of these "quality" players be? (serious question)

That would depend on what Smith's looking for, I suppose.

Pace and fitness would be a key base for both players.

In a perfect world, I'd be going for a little and large combination. Both fit, fast player who could perform at SPL level and improve with European matches.

Both would be able to work the channels if needed as well.

Maybe £4m for each one of them, and £2m on a young backup with great potential.

I know it's completely off the scale and would never happen, but in a perfect world with £10m for ALL our strikers, that's what I'd want.

Cool. Little and Large does work, did very well with Hately and either McCoist or Mojo. I would add, on top of yours, the ability to bag a minimum of 20 a piece in the SPL, dont think that should be a problem for a Rangers striker

How about Little and Fleck? Both have the potential, and, wouldnt cost that?

[Poetry_In_Blue 1,043]

That would depend on what Smith's looking for, I suppose.

Pace and fitness would be a key base for both players.

In a perfect world, I'd be going for a little and large combination. Both fit, fast player who could perform at SPL level and improve with European matches.

Both would be able to work the channels if needed as well.

Maybe £4m for each one of them, and £2m on a young backup with great potential.

I know it's completely off the scale and would never happen, but in a perfect world with £10m for ALL our strikers, that's what I'd want.

Don't we already have that though? As someone said earlier they can see Lafferty and Naismith being the future main partnership, why get rid of players who are doing a job for us, already have international experience, why waste money on unknowns who might fail for us and not capable of playing in the SPL. As for young back ups, why are we even contemplating spending money on a youngster when we could be giving Loy, Little and even Campbell chances to name just three?

[brissybear 50]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

You talk as if, if we didn't have miller, we would only play 10 men.......

[papaguy51 941]

I think Boyd's always worked better when someone else has done his running, that cannot be argued with.

But this isn't a Boyd thread!

[*Manticore* 1,893]

Maybe somebody should start a Boyd thread, I don't think we've ever had one.

[Poetry_In_Blue 1,043]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

You talk as if, if we didn't have miller, we would only play 10 men.......

Even though IT'S NOT a Boyd thread, people have argued in the past that Boyd up front on his own is like playing with 10 men!

[papaguy51 941]

Maybe somebody should start a Boyd thread, I don't think we've ever had one.

Superb idea Manti.

Original as well

[outlaw69uk 123]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

I think someone mentioned that, perhaps one of the reasons miller has more assists than boyd, was due to boyd finishing better, whereas miller doesnt, so, nobody else gets the assist. Pretty sure thats a few pages back

Thats a big gaurantee? Prior to Miller, we had Cousin and Darchville, who, arguabley gave us more movement. For all his faults, Cousin was a far far superior player than Miller. Its a bit more likely that the additions of Davis and Mendes, along with the emergence of Edu, and a fit Thomson becoming settled improved us far far more, and, added the creativity we did not have previously?

Also quite amusing you called him a "judas", whereas I refered to him by his squad number, yet, your slightly more insulting reference to him has gone unquestioned?

[Poetry_In_Blue 1,043]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

I think someone mentioned that, perhaps one of the reasons miller has more assists than boyd, was due to boyd finishing better, whereas miller doesnt, so, nobody else gets the assist. Pretty sure thats a few pages back

Thats a big gaurantee? Prior to Miller, we had Cousin and Darchville, who, arguabley gave us more movement. For all his faults, Cousin was a far far superior player than Miller. Its a bit more likely that the additions of Davis and Mendes, along with the emergence of Edu, and a fit Thomson becoming settled improved us far far more, and, added the creativity we did not have previously?

Also quite amusing you called him a "judas", whereas I refered to him by his squad number, yet, your slightly more insulting reference to him has gone unquestioned?

Well spotted, never noticed that, with regards to JCD, shame we didn't get him when he was a lot younger, as for Cousin, he could have did a job for us, in fact his goal against Celtic was a classic, but he wanted to leave.

[brissybear 50]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

I think someone mentioned that, perhaps one of the reasons miller has more assists than boyd, was due to boyd finishing better, whereas miller doesnt, so, nobody else gets the assist. Pretty sure thats a few pages back

Thats a big gaurantee? Prior to Miller, we had Cousin and Darchville, who, arguabley gave us more movement. For all his faults, Cousin was a far far superior player than Miller. Its a bit more likely that the additions of Davis and Mendes, along with the emergence of Edu, and a fit Thomson becoming settled improved us far far more, and, added the creativity we did not have previously?

Also quite amusing you called him a "judas", whereas I refered to him by his squad number, yet, your slightly more insulting reference to him has gone unquestioned?

I dont think any bear would condone what he did.....however... moving on,

Most of us can see what he brings to the team especially last season, for me he is the no1 striker on the sheet for me just now.

As for all the hype around Naismith and fleck, I just dont see it. fleck is still young and time will tell, but how old is Naismith now?? Just dont see it, but if folk think him or fleck are a better option than Miller then, so be it, thats opinion but i just cant see where folk are basing it from??

[Danny 9]

he is still not good enough,

Simply wrong. He's the Scotland Kenny Miller under Walter Smith, the one who gave 4 world class Italian defenders Hell at Hampden.

He's finally found consistency and the ability to produce his Scotland team form on the club stage - that's the critical difference.

The earlier club (Derby, us before, Timmy, Wolves) Miller was an average player who seemed to play out of his skin when Walter took over at Scotland.

Clearly Walter gets the best out of him, and Kenny Miller has become one of our most valuable and influential players.

So, just in case you didn't read it first time, you're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Brimming over with wrongability. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Wrong

That is your opinion, and while you are entitled to it, I believe it is you that are wrong wrong wrong.

Surely you are having a laugh at the Italy game example. If you really believe Miller gave the Italians the runaround at Hampden, your credibility has gone completely. We had one world class player that day who stood out a mile as our best player against a top quality side, and he has now been banned from representing his country and playing at Birmingham.

Are you talking about the 2-1 defeat? I might be wrong but I think Danny is talking about the 1-1 draw where Miller scored and caused problems all game.

I am. I don't think I've ever read a post from TB which had any understanding of the post he was replying to. Or contained anything I could accept to be true, never mind anything I agreed with.

[outlaw69uk 123]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

I think someone mentioned that, perhaps one of the reasons miller has more assists than boyd, was due to boyd finishing better, whereas miller doesnt, so, nobody else gets the assist. Pretty sure thats a few pages back

Thats a big gaurantee? Prior to Miller, we had Cousin and Darchville, who, arguabley gave us more movement. For all his faults, Cousin was a far far superior player than Miller. Its a bit more likely that the additions of Davis and Mendes, along with the emergence of Edu, and a fit Thomson becoming settled improved us far far more, and, added the creativity we did not have previously?

Also quite amusing you called him a "judas", whereas I refered to him by his squad number, yet, your slightly more insulting reference to him has gone unquestioned?

I dont think any bear would condone what he did.....however... moving on,

Most of us can see what he brings to the team especially last season, for me he is the no1 striker on the sheet for me just now.

As for all the hype around Naismith and fleck, I just dont see it. fleck is still young and time will tell, but how old is Naismith now?? Just dont see it, but if folk think him or fleck are a better option than Miller then, so be it, thats opinion but i just cant see where folk are basing it from??

Fleck is also the same age as Rooney and Owen where when they started playing for their first teams, regularly. I would, personally, also favour youth and potential, over a player that I dont think is good enough. Many have said the same all last season, regarding getting the likes of Dailly and McCulloch out the side in favour of younger players, who in the main were untried, such as, Aaron, Fleck, Edu etc. Thats another opinion not reflected in this thread

[outlaw69uk 123]

he is still not good enough,

Simply wrong. He's the Scotland Kenny Miller under Walter Smith, the one who gave 4 world class Italian defenders Hell at Hampden.

He's finally found consistency and the ability to produce his Scotland team form on the club stage - that's the critical difference.

The earlier club (Derby, us before, Timmy, Wolves) Miller was an average player who seemed to play out of his skin when Walter took over at Scotland.

Clearly Walter gets the best out of him, and Kenny Miller has become one of our most valuable and influential players.

So, just in case you didn't read it first time, you're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Brimming over with wrongability. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Wrong

That is your opinion, and while you are entitled to it, I believe it is you that are wrong wrong wrong.

Surely you are having a laugh at the Italy game example. If you really believe Miller gave the Italians the runaround at Hampden, your credibility has gone completely. We had one world class player that day who stood out a mile as our best player against a top quality side, and he has now been banned from representing his country and playing at Birmingham.

Are you talking about the 2-1 defeat? I might be wrong but I think Danny is talking about the 1-1 draw where Miller scored and caused problems all game.

I am. I don't think I've ever read a post from TB which had any understanding of the post he was replying to. Or contained anything I could accept to be true, never mind anything I agreed with.

So.... you dont believe the highlighted line?

[brissybear 50]

Not a pop at Boyd but they are completely different players, but Boyd wouldnt have scored half the goals he scored if it wasnt for Miller.

Of course, Boyd didn't score a goal till Miller arrived

How many assists did miller have last season?

How many titles did Boyds goals win us?

Wether you like it or not Miller improved us, he has gave us movement up front and I guarentee you better defenders in the SPL (although not many) and the defenders we will face in the CL, will be more worried about Miller.

Of course he has his faults and is a judas, but he gives you 100% and will be a big player in the CL. I tell you what play 4-5-1 with Boyd up top on his own we will struggle big time.

I think someone mentioned that, perhaps one of the reasons miller has more assists than boyd, was due to boyd finishing better, whereas miller doesnt, so, nobody else gets the assist. Pretty sure thats a few pages back

Thats a big gaurantee? Prior to Miller, we had Cousin and Darchville, who, arguabley gave us more movement. For all his faults, Cousin was a far far superior player than Miller. Its a bit more likely that the additions of Davis and Mendes, along with the emergence of Edu, and a fit Thomson becoming settled improved us far far more, and, added the creativity we did not have previously?

Also quite amusing you called him a "judas", whereas I refered to him by his squad number, yet, your slightly more insulting reference to him has gone unquestioned?

I dont think any bear would condone what he did.....however... moving on,

Most of us can see what he brings to the team especially last season, for me he is the no1 striker on the sheet for me just now.

As for all the hype around Naismith and fleck, I just dont see it. fleck is still young and time will tell, but how old is Naismith now?? Just dont see it, but if folk think him or fleck are a better option than Miller then, so be it, thats opinion but i just cant see where folk are basing it from??

Fleck is also the same age as Rooney and Owen where when they started playing for their first teams, regularly. I would, personally, also favour youth and potential, over a player that I dont think is good enough. Many have said the same all last season, regarding getting the likes of Dailly and McCulloch out the side in favour of younger players, who in the main were untried, such as, Aaron, Fleck, Edu etc. Thats another opinion not reflected in this thread

Winning the SPL is vital for us, we dont have the luxury of giving potential the chance, if we have better options, which in the case of miller, we do.

I wasnt having a pop about your perosnal opinion of Miller, couldnt care less Outlaw, just perplexed how you and others think we have better options outwith Lafferty?

[Danny 9]

As per your later post, if you read it, I dont think his Scotland form was good enough either. Smith does clearly get the best out of him, but, its not good enough for me.

Why not?

If his current form is so much better, why havent his stats improved drastically? Surey they would have?

They have. He's scored 2 goals in the first 3 games of the SPL season.

All players can have standout games, christ, most people loved the line in reference to Charlie Adam that "a few good games dont gloss over the rest of his performances, he isnt good enough" (paraphrasing)

In your opinion, Kenny Miller isn't good enough; can you explain what's substandard about his football?

His goalscoring is on a par with what you would expect from a striker at a team like hibs or hearts, according to how many he gets per season.

To use another classic RM argument base, if he IS so good, why was he never linked with a move away? (its not one I like, but, many seem to)

Because last season was his first season? And most of the signings we made, Edu, Velicka, Lafferty, Davis and Mendes weren't either apart from some loose idle speculation in the case of the latter 2. Yet would you deny the qualities of the above 5 players?

I would argue that every other midfielder, Weir and Boughera are far more important and influential. Add to that, if we are in dire need of a goal, percentage wise, how confident are you miller would get it?

You are loving the word wrong tonight fella, and unsurprisingly managed to make a point without claiming its "just because he played for them"

But I like Miller. His past employers are used when it's someone who doesn't like him. I used to hate him, completely, citing both his timmery and the fact he wasn't good enough in terms of club form. But bingo, I got over myself and he's won me over completely.

He's not going to achieve that with everyone, such as you. But I don't really care

[Danny 9]

he is still not good enough,

Simply wrong. He's the Scotland Kenny Miller under Walter Smith, the one who gave 4 world class Italian defenders Hell at Hampden.

He's finally found consistency and the ability to produce his Scotland team form on the club stage - that's the critical difference.

The earlier club (Derby, us before, Timmy, Wolves) Miller was an average player who seemed to play out of his skin when Walter took over at Scotland.

Clearly Walter gets the best out of him, and Kenny Miller has become one of our most valuable and influential players.

So, just in case you didn't read it first time, you're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Brimming over with wrongability. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Wrong

That is your opinion, and while you are entitled to it, I believe it is you that are wrong wrong wrong.

Surely you are having a laugh at the Italy game example. If you really believe Miller gave the Italians the runaround at Hampden, your credibility has gone completely. We had one world class player that day who stood out a mile as our best player against a top quality side, and he has now been banned from representing his country and playing at Birmingham.

Are you talking about the 2-1 defeat? I might be wrong but I think Danny is talking about the 1-1 draw where Miller scored and caused problems all game.

I am. I don't think I've ever read a post from TB which had any understanding of the post he was replying to. Or contained anything I could accept to be true, never mind anything I agreed with.

So.... you dont believe the highlighted line?

I would have had to read it. I stopped doing that with him some time ago.

[*Manticore* 1,893]

He's not going to achieve that with everyone, such as you. But I don't really care

You just haven't mastered the fishing thing have you Danny